"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:> But if "eliminate global depencies" is it, we can be allies, because> ultimately we both want to get the config system to the same place.> I've taken the first, biggest step -- from imperative code to> declaration/constraint language. The second -- from a> declaration/constraint language to a metadata-centered system --> will be easier.

Well, let's simmer things down a bit and see what other people have tosay. Maybe I'm completely off base.

But to answer the question which the subtext seemed to asking (at leastto me), no, there is no vendetta against you. And for the record on aspecific detail, I have no problem with python use. If I have no majorobjection based purely on technical grounds, that what you'll be hearingfrom me.

And further, in 2.5.x series at least, minor objections can be workedthrough after a kernel merge. But major objections... that's not thetime when something -must- -go- -in-.

Regards,

Jeff

-- Jeff Garzik | "Why is it that attractive girls like youBuilding 1024 | always seem to have a boyfriend?"MandrakeSoft | "Because I'm a nympho that owns a brewery?" | - BBC TV show "Coupling"-To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" inthe body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.orgMore majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlPlease read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/